Oral Argument in The United States

Oral arguments are spoken to a judge or appellate court by a lawyer (or parties when representing themselves) of the legal reasons why they should prevail. Oral argument at the appellate level accompanies written briefs, which also advance the argument of each party in the legal dispute. Oral arguments can also occur during motion practice when one of the parties presents a motion to the court for consideration before trial, such as when the case is to be dismissed on a point of law, or when summary judgment may lie because there are no factual issues in dispute.

Oral argument operates by each party in a case taking turns to speak directly to the judge or judges with an equal amount of time allotted to each. A party may often reserve part of their time to be used for rebuttal after their adversary has presented.

Presenting lawyers usually cannot get away with simply making speeches or reading their briefs when presenting oral argument to an appeal court. Unlike trial court procedure, where judges intervene only when asked by the parties to resolve objections, it is typical for judges at the appellate level to be active participants in oral argument, interrupting the presenting lawyers and asking questions. This is true even of courts that are formed of panels of multiple judges, such as the United States Supreme Court, where a presenting lawyer must be prepared to handle questions from any of the nine justices. It is also true that when a motion is made before or during trial that the lawyers conduct themselves before the judge in a manner similar to the presentation of the case on appeal, the lawyers present their arguments to the judge in a more conversational mode; in some pre-trial proceedings these appearances may not be recorded by court stenographers as they are invariably recorded in appellate proceedings.

Oral argument is not always considered an essential part of due process, as the briefs also give the parties an opportunity to be heard by the court. Whether a court will permit, require, or guarantee the opportunity to present oral argument is usually left up to each court to decide as part of its rules of procedure, with differences from court to court even within a single jurisdiction. Some courts may guarantee the right to present oral argument, either requiring the parties to request to present or their waiver if they do not wish to, while other courts may require oral argument without the ability to waive it. Courts may also have the discretion to decide a case without presentation of oral argument, rendering their judgment entirely based on the arguments set forth in the parties' briefs.

Famous quotes containing the words united states, oral, argument, united and/or states:

    ... while one-half of the people of the United States are robbed of their inherent right of personal representation in this freest country on the face of the globe, it is idle for us to expect that the men who thus rob women will not rob each other as individuals, corporations and Government.
    Susan B. Anthony (1820–1906)

    We have seen over and over that white male historians in general have tended to dismiss any history they didn’t themselves write, on the grounds that it is unserious, unscholarly, a fad, too “political,” “merely” oral and thus unreliable.
    Adrienne Rich (b. 1929)

    The argument is over.
    St. Augustine (354–430)

    We are apt to say that a foreign policy is successful only when the country, or at any rate the governing class, is united behind it. In reality, every line of policy is repudiated by a section, often by an influential section, of the country concerned. A foreign minister who waited until everyone agreed with him would have no foreign policy at all.
    —A.J.P. (Alan John Percivale)

    The government of the United States is a device for maintaining in perpetuity the rights of the people, with the ultimate extinction of all privileged classes.
    Calvin Coolidge (1872–1933)